User talk:103.246.39.1

Welcome!

Hello 103.246.39.1! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. You are welcome to continue editing articles without logging in, but you may wish to create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits. If you edit without a username, your IP address (103.246.39.1) is used to identify you instead. In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to help you get started. Happy editing! - wolf 15:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC) Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

July 2021

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Torrens, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ----Rdp060707|talk 05:58, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I figured that. You are too quick for me. Thanks.103.246.39.1 (talk) 06:00, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Median strip, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. ----Rdp060707|talk 07:11, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

I just gave you a reason!! Now what is your reason! Just stop your nonsense!!103.246.39.1 (talk) 07:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Road 84 (Iran), you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. ----Rdp060707|talk 05:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make disruptive edits to Wikipedia contrary to the Manual of Style. ----Rdp060707|talk 05:03, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Oh yeah?? Go ahead! You stop being a dope! I will take this matter to the Wikipedia noticeboard! Learn to Assume good faith.103.246.39.1 (talk) 05:05, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

August 2021

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Dawood Ibrahim. Ekuftle (talk) 08:29, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Excuse me. The infobox says otherwise! He is not from Mumbai103.246.39.1 (talk) 08:30, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Rdp060707. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ----Rdp060707|talk 08:33, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Marina Khan (bowls), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. ----Rdp060707|talk 07:53, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry. This is Marina Josephine Khan. And the other one is Marina Khan.103.246.39.1 (talk) 07:55, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to use disruptive, inappropriate or hard-to-read formatting, as you did at Deen, you may be blocked from editing. There is a Wikipedia Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. ----Rdp060707|talk 07:52, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia. ----Rdp060707|talk 08:29, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello, I'm Rdp060707. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. ----Rdp060707|talk 04:47, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ----Rdp060707|talk 08:38, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Note about verifiability and the bold-revert-discuss guideline

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Please note that, per the verifiability policy, "the burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material", and that "any material lacking an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source".

You may also find the bold-revert-discuss guideline and the introduction to policies and guidelines useful.

Please also remember to avoid personal attacks.

Thank you. — Lauritz Thomsen (talk) 11:39, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

As I said before, the other paragraph does not have sources too. So maybe you should delete them too. Otherwise, it seems that you are showing favouritism.103.246.39.1 (talk) 04:52, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Not quite. Editors aren't obliged to remove unsourced statements, but if an unsourced statement is removed then it stays out until it's supported with a reliable source. If you see an unsourced statement that doesn't belong then by all means delete it. If it seems plausible but needs support then leave it and add a {{cn}} ("citation needed") to the offending claim.

• Your first revision to Simply Irresistible was removed [1] because you didn't cite a source to support it. How can old 'Tone Deaf' Joe from Tin Ear county know that what you wrote is true unless you cite a reliable source that confirms it?
• Your second revision was removed [2] because you and your source weren't talking about the same thing.
• Your third revision was removed [3] because the article's author had sorted a lot of songs into broad categories which you used to support a particular affinity between two songs from a group of 32. In truth there was no more affinity between 'Simply Irresistible' and 'My Sharona' than between 'Irresistible' and any of the other 30 songs in the group.

We can discuss this further if you like at Talk:Simply Irresistible (song). In the meantime please read WP:3RR, for your own sake. Yappy2bhere (talk) 08:49, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Would it be a good idea to put all the 32 songs in the list too?103.246.39.1 (talk) 05:01, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't think it would help. The paper argues that a hook is a syncopated accent pattern in a particular context: during the title ('I've Done Everything for You'), within a melodic riff ('For Those About to Rock'), or just before the chorus ('My Sharona'). There are 3 to 8 examples of pre-chorus hooks with a <333322> accent pattern, depending on what you call a "hook" (the paper doesn't define it), but no complete list. "Definitely these, probably those, maybe others have this similarity" doesn't much improve upon "'Sharona' and 'Irresistible' are similar that way."

'Simply Irresistible' is the title song because (1) the songwriter identified the hook in the liner notes, (2) the hook is a drum solo, confounding competing theories that posit a melodic hook, and (3) there's also a melodic hook in the song, or at least a "gesture" that could be, so neener neener competing theories. Nothing to do with the song per se--with a different arrangement or without the discussion of the hook in the liner notes the song may not have been commented on at all.

Unfortunately 'My Sharona' has only one hook, a melodic hook with a catchy lyric, so now I think there's less to recommend a comparison to 'Simply Irresistible' than after I first read Traut. Yappy2bhere (talk) 09:40, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Wow, I love the way you have written. Do you have a degree in music or are you a musician? 103.246.39.1 (talk) 04:41, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

June 2022

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for violations of Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy, as done at Tops Friendly Markets.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  BusterD (talk) 07:01, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

103.246.39.1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

This is unfair. This is not blp. This person did the crime and there is a source. I want another person to review the block.

Decline reason:

WP:BLP policy applies to recently deceased persons as well as living ones. You have placed this material into two different pages, been reverted, then replaced it, against consensus to include as measured in this discussion the concluding edit made by admin User:Daniel Case. The underlying issue as I see it is your frequent and casual disregard of BLP policy, willful and repeated violation as demonstrated by these redacted diffs. Blocks are not punitive, they are preventative. Your continuting to pursue these current insertions after reversion with no discussion demonstrates those repeated prior violations were not mere anomalies. If you were to agree not to further insert this sort of material, pledge to read the BLP policy, and refrain from taking further such liberties I would unblock you myself or allow any admin to unblock. FTR, I am always open to my blocks being reviewed by any admin. BusterD (talk) 10:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Thank you User:Ohnoitsjamie for a second set of eyes on this block. Appreciate the knowledge you bring. BusterD (talk) 13:30, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for catching this in the first place! I won't be able to edit much over the next few days, but this IP is likely connected to this LTA. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:39, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

---